House of Commons photo

Track Francis

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is water.

Liberal MP for Lac-Saint-Louis (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2021, with 56% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Budget April 12th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the budget is a document that is both nuanced and comprehensive. It implements many election promises that, taken together, constitute the economic vision that the Liberal Party laid out during the election campaign and that earned the confidence of Canadians on October 19.

In fact, the budget plays a dual role. It focuses on the immediate needs of today's economy, as well as the challenges that we must address in the longer term if we want to make a better future for our children and our grandchildren.

The budget addresses the needs of our times, this economic period where growth has been slow for far too long. It addresses the increasingly pressing need to lay the foundation to increase the longer-term productivity of our Canadian industries. Without that, we will not really be able to support and encourage the strong growth we need in the coming years to create the necessary tax revenue for funding the social programs that are so dear to us and are often at the very heart of our Canadian identity.

In addition to the temporal aspect of the budget, there is the fact that it is multifaceted because of an insightful and wise acknowledgement that the economy is complex and composed of diverse and related elements and that we must act on different fronts simultaneously to create the growth that will allow each and every one of us to prosper with dignity and to have a good quality of life.

The budget recognizes, for example, that we must look after the economy and the environment at the same time. We have to ensure that our businesses are healthy and also protect the well-being of our children. We need major infrastructure, such as efficient public transit networks, but also meeting places where people can get together for socialization and recreation and to talk to, support, and help one another.

We have to innovate with new technologies and products brought to market, but we must also provide our university researchers with the means to explore these concepts that are sometimes still in the early stages and whose practical application and economic viability are still unknown.

In short, its comprehensive vision truly makes this a Liberal budget.

There has been much talk about the deficit. No one really wants deficits as a matter of ideology, at least not on this side of the House. In fact, as Liberals, we have been in the past elected to wrestle deficits to the ground.

However, there is a time when deficits are helpful on a short-term basis to stabilize the economy, build the confidence of consumers, businesses and investors and sow the seeds of future growth, and Canadians have determined that this time is now.

The need to invest in Canada's future, even at the cost of modest deficits, was not only endorsed by Canadians in the last election. The idea is reverberating in other developed nations as they come to realize that monetary policy has come up against its limitations, and cannot by itself move the economy out of its current doldrums.

No lesser a Canadian business leader than Michael Sabia, hardly a promoter of socialist economic fantasies, has said that it is time “to focus on the real economy”, as opposed to the monetary economy only.

Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz has recently said that he is putting off further monetary easing, namely through further interest rate cuts, until he evaluates the extent of the fiscal stimulus coming from the federal government.

David Watt, chief economist at HSBC Canada, as per an article in The Globe and Mail of March 12, said:

What we need is more of a change in perception of where we want the economy to go and set the stage for not just government, but for the private sector to start creating jobs...The private sector doesn’t have confidence to start adding jobs and that’s what we need.

What he is saying is that the previous government after 10 years did not create that confidence.

This budget, both subtle in design and forward-looking and comprehensive in scope, will achieve dual results. It will create jobs in the short term by investing in projects to renew Canada's social, green, and public transit infrastructures and it will also spur confidence in the future by acting today to create the conditions needed to support growth in the years ahead.

According to The Economist in its February 20 issue:

The good news is that...Plenty of policies are left, and all can pack a punch. The bad news is that central banks will need help from governments. Until now, central bankers have had to do the heavy lifting because politicians have been...reluctant to share the burden. At least some of them have failed to grasp the need to have fiscal and monetary policy operating in concert. Indeed, many governments actively worked against monetary stimulus by embracing austerity.

I would add that the previous government was repeatedly criticized specifically for pursuing an inherently self-contradictory economic policy.

The Economist goes on to say:

Bond markets and rating agencies will look more kindly on the increase in public debt if there are fresh and productive assets on the other side of the balance sheet. Above all, such assets should involve infrastructure...

In line with this prediction by one of the world's most reputable publications read by leaders and finance ministers around the world, on March 30 The Globe and Mail ran the following heading, “Investors, rating agencies see Liberal deficit plan as manageable”.

The Conservatives believe in markets and market signals. They sometimes even elevate markets to the status of religion and attribute magical powers to markets to solve a whole range of problems that are not necessarily economic in nature.

The financial markets are speaking to the Conservatives right now. Moody's Investors Service's vice-president Steven Hess has said that the deficit is not large as a share of the economy and that the federal debt-to-GDP ratio is low by international standards.

David Madani of Capital Economics has said, “the market’s 'shrug' is hardly a surprise because the risk that the budget’s projected deficits would trigger a surge in Ottawa’s borrowing costs 'is practically zero'.”

To the foregoing I would reference another headline in The Globe and Mail, on March 3, “Big banks urge Ottawa to spend $20-billion in rapid stimulus”.

This is a finely designed budget that focuses on real problems. That is what Canadians wanted and that is what Canadians were expecting.

One of my policy interests is water. I am proud to say that for the first time in as long as I can remember in this House a budget is giving a specific priority to water namely, water filtration and waste water infrastructure. As announced in the budget, there will be $5 billion for green infrastructure of which a large amount will be for water and waste water infrastructure.

Water is becoming a greater priority for Canadians not only because of the impact of climate change on water supplies, but because Canadians are becoming more concerned with the quality of the water in their ecosystem. We have seen this repeatedly with a number of issues. This budget takes a step in the right direction in making water a priority of public policy at the federal level.

The budget is a step in the right direction. There will be more to come in the years to come throughout this mandate. This Liberal government acted quickly to implement a good number of the promises that were discussed in the election campaign and that Canadians resoundingly supported.

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Madam Speaker, I would note that the government will be investing over $440 million to enhance the Canada Revenue Agency's ability to detect, audit, and prosecute tax evasion, and that will result in a twelvefold increase in the number of tax schemes examined by the CRA. Is that not a good return on investment?

World Water Day March 22nd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, World Water Day is a welcome reminder that water is vital to human health and to the health of our natural ecosystems.

Water is also fundamental to the economy. From the earliest days of the agricultural and industrial revolutions to today's digital age, water is a staple input in the production process.

We all recognize and understand water's all-encompassing role in our lives.

However, our challenge remains to harmonize the policies of all the different jurisdictions, such as the watershed areas, municipalities, provinces, first nations, the federal government and the international community, which govern and influence the use, protection and conservation of our drinking water resources.

On this World Water Day, let us reaffirm our commitment to making water a public policy priority, especially for the sake of those who are without the clean water they need to lead healthy and prosperous lives, and for future generations who will be living in a water-stressed world.

Citizenship Act March 9th, 2016

Madam Speaker, the essence of this bill was expressed in a prominent exchange between the former prime minister and the current Prime Minister in the Munk debates during the election campaign, which some see as a defining moment or turning point in the campaign, so the essence of the bill is not a surprise to the Canadian people, who voted for a Liberal government on October 19.

The hon. member was talking about Canadian values and accusing the Liberals of believing that there are no Canadian values, which I found to be a slightly outrageous statement. Liberals believe that one of the clearest expressions and codifications of Canadian values is in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The United States does not allow for the revocation of citizenship as a result of a Supreme Court decision. Some European countries that were cited by the hon. member do allow for revocation, but their systems of law are not as similar to the U.S. system of judicial law as ours is.

I will quote Dale Gibson, a legal historian in Alberta, who, in comparing these laws in different countries, stated that “...surely the American legal system is considerably closer to ours than many of the European ones” that allow revocation of citizenship. The U.S., unlike Britain, has a constitutional bill of rights.

Therefore, I would like the member's comments on the fact that the United States, which has a very prominent war on terror, does not allow for the revocation of citizenship.

Business of Supply March 8th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the members opposite speak of politics and political decisions; I prefer to speak of societal choices. Societal choices are transmitted through the democratic process, and that is exactly what happened in the election in this part of the country.

Let us use Banff as an example. A decision has been made that the people of Alberta no longer want additional development in Banff. Is the member saying that according to the evidence it is because one additional secondary residence in Banff would be catastrophic for the area, or is it a societal choice on the part of the people of Alberta who do not want to live in that kind of environment?

My comment for the member is this. The people who make decisions about buying planes, the engineers and the experts at the airlines, understand the merits of the plane. They know what it can do. That is what they are going to base their decision on. They are not going to base their decision on whether the government in Canada allowed this airport to expand its runway or not expand its runway. It is not germane to the purchasing decision.

Europe has a history of protests over airport expansions and so on. Europeans understand this. It is part of their history and culture that some people want to preserve their quality of life. That is exactly what is happening here. There has been a societal choice to preserve a quality of life in a part of a big city in Canada.

Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL February 23rd, 2016

Madam Speaker, I would say to the hon. member that failing our allies would be to leave the theatre of war completely, not to increase our presence there. Failing our allies would be to not contribute to alleviating the refugee crisis.

Canada has a proud military heritage, but it also has a proud humanitarian heritage. We have not been static across time in our approach to these things. Sometimes we get involved directly in conflict. Sometimes we help in other ways. Sometimes we do peacekeeping. Sometimes we do peacemaking. We have not been static, but the opposition seems fixated on having Canada always pull the trigger.

In any combat situation there is going to be refocusing. Countries refocus so they can realign their efforts to make them more internally consistent and effective.

The previous government used to tell us that we could do everything well. We could drop bombs and help Syrian refugees, but it was not able too help Syrian refugees. It was a failure on that file. We at least have made progress, and we are realigning our efforts more in the humanitarian direction.

Canada Labour Code February 3rd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, just to the hon. member's point about all the private members' bills that were adopted in the last Parliament, I do not know if he is aware that most of those private members' bills were government bills dressed up as private members' bills, and the government used its majority to get them through. That is why so many were passed.

I think it is quite clear that the previous government was trying to weaken the labour movement. We all agree on that. The question is why was it doing that. If we asked members on the other side, they would say because it would solve problems, it would solve economic problems and solve other problems.

Does the hon. member think that the problems we are having with the economy today are a result of the fact that we have unions, or are there other reasons we are in an economic slowdown?

On the social side, by getting rid of unions, would we have better education? Would we have better health care?

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 26th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I too would like to congratulate the hon. member on her re-election.

My riding is often called a suburb, but it also has a rural aspect. In fact, we are fortunate to have the environmental and agricultural sciences faculty of McGill University in Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, so I know a thing or two about the issues facing the rural and farming sector. In response to the question raised about the deadline, I know that we have talked about it and that we spoke with representatives of the dairy industry when we were in opposition. However, unfortunately, since I am not the Minister of Agriculture, I do not have an answer regarding the specific deadline.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 26th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question, because over time we have learned to see the world a little differently than we used to. We used to see it as a group of silos. Now we see the world as an ecosystem; we see communities as ecosystems; and I have often said to my constituents that what is so special about my community—and I am sure this is the case of all the communities represented here—is that we have a network of community groups that fulfill just about every need that an individual or a family could have.

I often say to my constituents that, yes, we have nice homes in our riding. They are buildings on a lot with a car, but that is not a community. A community is when the people in those homes gather in places like the Kizmet Centre, which hopefully will be built, to share ideas and to make connections to help each other.

That is why housing is important. Of course it is important, but we have to bring the people who live in those homes, whether they be social housing or single-unit homes, together to co-operate and to share their lives together.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 26th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the hon. member to the House and congratulate her on her election.

As the member knows, we have annual budgets in the House, and it is through those annual budgets that details are given in regard to initiatives like the ones I was speaking about in my speech. In terms of the number of jobs, it will depend on the mix of spending. Some projects will create more jobs than others. The point of infrastructure spending is to bring tangible benefits to Canadians today but also to prepare the ground for economic recovery in the future. If we have an economic recovery but we cannot get people from point A to point B, from their homes to the jobs that are opening up, then that economic recovery will hit a ceiling.

We are investing for benefit today, but really we are looking toward the future. This is a future-oriented government, and that is why we are making those investments.